Day 1:
This may come back to bite dems but...is today's hearing pointless?
The reason I ask is, neither if these two had first hand knowledge, but only heard it from other people. That is hearsay. Now, during this portion of the events, it may make for a good show, but, hearsay is not admissible as evidence. What happens if it goes to trial in the senate, and they say that all these testimonies that rely on hearsay are to be disregarded?
Jim Jordan did make a good point to Taylor's, and that is, if he got his information second hand, how does he know the original source is not wrong, or got some facts wrong.
And I know some will say "but this is not a criminal court but a political court", doesnt matter, still cant use hearsay as evidence, people make up stuff all the time.